User Tag List

Page 134 of 149 FirstFirst ... 3484124131132133134135136137144 ... LastLast
Results 1,996 to 2,010 of 2224

Thread: Is the Bible the only sacred texts and why or why not.

  1. #1996
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    7,869
    Thanks
    3,019
    Thanked 1,400 Times in 1,181 Posts

    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    64748
    Likewise friend.

    Quote Originally Posted by God's Truth View Post
    Of course I am going to talk about how they are different.

    I will always expose falseness and defend the truth.
    Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

  2. #1997
    TOL Legend God's Truth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    38,504
    Thanks
    1,987
    Thanked 2,693 Times in 2,477 Posts

    Blog Entries
    3
    Mentioned
    70 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by popsthebuilder View Post
    Likewise friend.



    Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk
    Then stand up for the Bible in which we can obey and receive the Holy Spirit.

    Show me how the Qur'an says we can receive the Holy Spirit.
    Oh how I love the Word of God!

    Do not just read the word do it.

  3. #1998
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    7,869
    Thanks
    3,019
    Thanked 1,400 Times in 1,181 Posts

    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    64748
    Quote Originally Posted by God's Truth View Post
    Then stand up for the Bible in which we can obey and receive the Holy Spirit.

    Show me how the Qur'an says we can receive the Holy Spirit.
    The direction of the Lord is given freely to all who even with to submit to GOD.

    through it's (the Quran) entirety it teaches how to receive the Spirit, yet it never speaks such directly really.





    Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

  4. #1999
    Over 2500 post club Apple7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    2,663
    Thanks
    281
    Thanked 944 Times in 621 Posts

    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    154387
    Quote Originally Posted by popsthebuilder View Post
    Please don't assume I do not know the book.


    Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

    You don't.

    Period.

  5. #2000
    Old Timer SonOfCaleb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    465
    Thanks
    54
    Thanked 141 Times in 116 Posts

    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    7489
    Quote Originally Posted by freelight View Post


    Good commentary bringing some significant points in the Apocrypha once being accepted more universally in earlier times, and the question of their removal from the standard canon, possible various reasons. - It appears probable that subtle religio-social-political currents were behind some of the changes in canon, with modifications, redactions inclusions/exclusions being affected thereby. The issue of the Septuagint is also most interesting, and if or how the masoretic text agrees with it and where it differs, if any Jewish scribes altered the text, etc.
    The Apocrypha and Gnostic gospels are not Canon. They were not included in the books that were used for the teaching of the 'Law' to the Jews. As you know the Bible Canon was closed towards the end of the 1st Century AD. The Muratorian fragment is the best extant source proving the Canonicity of the current books of the Bible from Genesis to Revelation.

    We would note however that 'apocrypha' simply means 'hidden', 'secret' 'esoteric', 'obscure', - other 'inter-testamental works' were accepted and used by earlier followers of Jesus, such as the book of Enoch, while the term 'Son of Man' used by Enoch may have been adopted from it by Jesus himself, although other OT prophets were also referred to as a 'son of man'.
    The Book of Enoch is dated to the 1st/2nd Century BCE. Many uninspired books were used by various authors of the Bible such as the "Book of Jashar", the "Book of the Wars of Jehovah" and many others but none of these books were viewed as inspired and thus were non-canonical and were not included in religious instruction by the Jews.
    John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god. 2 This one was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence".

  6. #2001
    Old Timer
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    372
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 59 Times in 48 Posts

    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    15618
    What humans don't know (not even Mohammad) is the process of human witnessing. What elements make a human witnessing valid. Humans are kept in the darkness though they take it for granted when making use of it without their awareness.


    It is a Jewish tradition that you need to two witnesses to testify in order for a testimony to stand valid. This is the basic measure to avoid false testimonies (such as Koran?). Even Jesus needs 2 witnesses in the absence of any humans. He has God the Father and God the Holy Spirit to be His witnesses.

    This makes an human account of testimony a valid one.

    Both OT and NT are multiple account testimonies, but not any other holy books. It shows that the authors of those other holy books are clueless about the human witnessing is.

    In order for a valid account of testimony to work, you need to first preach it, then you need faith to believe. Daily News on TVs are undergoing the same exact process. The piece of news first needs to be broadcast (preached), then the audience need faith in the media for the contents to stand as facts. Multiple witnesses, preaching, believe with faith are thus the 3 elements of a valid human witnessing to stand. We can choose to watch only one TV channel but that's provided we already build up faith in its credibility and reliability. Before we consider this channel as a reliable one, most likely we cross reference other media to confirm a piece of important news.

    OT prophets are all called God's witnesses explicitly. Preaching the to the whole world to invite faith is an explicit commandment. No other holy book can make it explicit at all or to this extent.

    Then the next is why a religion is a must to be employed. It is because humans don't (didn't) have the capability of keeping original documents, especially before the invention of paper. Inside today's great libraries, not a single book has its full ancient manuscripts successfully conserved by humans (unless you try to fallacious argue that one piece of manuscript can be used to support a book of 1000 pages).

    The only document with mass amount of manuscripts or even a complete set (Dead Sea Scrolls for OT) of manuscripts is the Bible, which existed before the invention of paper. A religion plays a key role in conserving a complete theology and to bring it across history before the invention of paper.

    The next is how the Bible's contents are secured? God authenticated the Jews to secure the OT Canon. They are stubborn (may not be a good word) people that no one can add or subtract any contents from the Canon they are guarding. God's earthly church, though intangible, successfully guards the NT Canon thus no one can add or subtract contents. Mormon tried but not that successfully, it's thus widely considered as heresy.

    Such a kind of authentication itself is formal and explicit.

    Law and Prophets are proclaimed till John the Baptist, since then the gospel is to be preached. This marks a formal and explicit announcement that the NT is effective from John the Baptist and onward.

    There's another verse saying that binding and loosing (lawful authority) goes through Peter as the authority of the intangible earthly church. This authentication of earthly church is formal and explicit. It's as lawful as it can be. This is a formal announcement of authority shift from the Jews to the Church of Christians.

    All the measure mentioned may have anything to do with Satan's attack. Because the NT Bible is true in terms of salvation, Satan will have to launch his attack. It drives the need of canonization which actually further secures the contents of our NT Bible.


    In comparison, other holy books are a joke!
    Last edited by Hawkins; May 30th, 2018 at 04:30 PM.

  7. #2002
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    7,869
    Thanks
    3,019
    Thanked 1,400 Times in 1,181 Posts

    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    64748
    What makes you think the Quran or other sacred texts don't mention two witnesses?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hawkins View Post
    What humans don't know (not even Mohammad) is the process of human witnessing. What elements make a human witnessing valid. Humans are kept in the darkness though they take it for granted when making use of it without their awareness.


    It is a Jewish tradition that you need to two witnesses to testify in order for a testimony to stand valid. This is the basic measure to avoid false testimonies (such as Koran?). Even Jesus needs 2 witnesses in the absence of any humans. He has God the Father and God the Holy Spirit to be His witnesses.

    This makes an human account of testimony a valid one.

    Both OT and NT are multiple account testimonies, but not any other holy books. It shows that the authors of those other holy books are clueless about the human witnessing is.

    In order for a valid account of testimony to work, you need to first preach it, then you need faith to believe. Daily News on TVs are undergoing the same exact process. The piece of news first needs to be broadcast (preached), then the audience need faith in the media for the contents to stand as facts. Multiple witnesses, preaching, believe with faith are thus the 3 elements of a valid human witnessing to stand. We can choose to watch only one TV channel but that's provided we already build up faith in its credibility and reliability. Before we consider this channel as a reliable one, most likely we cross reference other media to confirm a piece of important news.

    OT prophets are all called God's witnesses explicitly. Preaching the to the whole world to invite faith is an explicit commandment. No other holy book can make it explicit at all or to this extent.

    Then the next is why a religion is a must to be employed. It is because humans don't (didn't) have the capability of keeping original documents, especially before the invention of paper. Inside today's great libraries, not a single book has its full ancient manuscripts successfully conserved by humans (unless you try to fallacious argue that one piece of manuscript can be used to support a book of 1000 pages).

    The only document with mass amount of manuscripts or even a complete set (Dead Sea Scrolls for OT) of manuscripts is the Bible, which existed before the invention of paper. A religion plays a key role in conserving a complete theology and to bring it across history before the invention of paper.

    The next is how the Bible's contents are secured? God authenticated the Jews to secure the OT Canon. They are stubborn (may not be a good word) people that no one can add or subtract any contents from the Canon they are guarding. God's earthly church, though intangible, successfully guards the NT Canon thus no one can add or subtract contents. Mormon tried but not that successfully, it's thus widely considered as heresy.

    Such a kind of authentication itself is formal and explicit.

    Law and Prophets are proclaimed till John the Baptist, since then the gospel is to be preached. This marks a formal and explicit announcement that the NT is effective from John the Baptist and onward.

    There's another verse saying that binding and loosing (lawful authority) goes through Peter as the authority of the intangible earthly church. This authentication of earthly church is formal and explicit. It's as lawful as it can be.

    In comparison, other holy books are a joke!
    Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

  8. #2003
    Old Timer
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    372
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 59 Times in 48 Posts

    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    15618
    Quote Originally Posted by popsthebuilder View Post
    What makes you think the Quran or other sacred texts don't mention two witnesses?



    Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk
    It is because Koran is commonly referred to as the work of Mohammad. Do you have a verse quote from Koran saying that another witness other than Mohammed is needed for Koran to stand true?

    I listed tons of points and you have only one to respond to?

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to Hawkins For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (June 13th, 2018)

  10. #2004
    Old Timer
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    372
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 59 Times in 48 Posts

    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    15618
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawkins View Post
    What humans don't know (not even Mohammad) is the process of human witnessing. What elements make a human witnessing valid. Humans are kept in the darkness though they take it for granted when making use of it without their awareness.


    It is a Jewish tradition that you need to two witnesses to testify in order for a testimony to stand valid. This is the basic measure to avoid false testimonies (such as Koran?). Even Jesus needs 2 witnesses in the absence of any humans. He has God the Father and God the Holy Spirit to be His witnesses.

    This makes an human account of testimony a valid one.

    Both OT and NT are multiple account testimonies, but not any other holy books. It shows that the authors of those other holy books are clueless about the human witnessing is.

    In order for a valid account of testimony to work, you need to first preach it, then you need faith to believe. Daily News on TVs are undergoing the same exact process. The piece of news first needs to be broadcast (preached), then the audience need faith in the media for the contents to stand as facts. Multiple witnesses, preaching, believe with faith are thus the 3 elements of a valid human witnessing to stand. We can choose to watch only one TV channel but that's provided we already build up faith in its credibility and reliability. Before we consider this channel as a reliable one, most likely we cross reference other media to confirm a piece of important news.

    OT prophets are all called God's witnesses explicitly. Preaching the to the whole world to invite faith is an explicit commandment. No other holy book can make it explicit at all or to this extent.

    Then the next is why a religion is a must to be employed. It is because humans don't (didn't) have the capability of keeping original documents, especially before the invention of paper. Inside today's great libraries, not a single book has its full ancient manuscripts successfully conserved by humans (unless you try to fallacious argue that one piece of manuscript can be used to support a book of 1000 pages).

    The only document with mass amount of manuscripts or even a complete set (Dead Sea Scrolls for OT) of manuscripts is the Bible, which existed before the invention of paper. A religion plays a key role in conserving a complete theology and to bring it across history before the invention of paper.

    The next is how the Bible's contents are secured? God authenticated the Jews to secure the OT Canon. They are stubborn (may not be a good word) people that no one can add or subtract any contents from the Canon they are guarding. God's earthly church, though intangible, successfully guards the NT Canon thus no one can add or subtract contents. Mormon tried but not that successfully, it's thus widely considered as heresy.

    Such a kind of authentication itself is formal and explicit.

    Law and Prophets are proclaimed till John the Baptist, since then the gospel is to be preached. This marks a formal and explicit announcement that the NT is effective from John the Baptist and onward.

    There's another verse saying that binding and loosing (lawful authority) goes through Peter as the authority of the intangible earthly church. This authentication of earthly church is formal and explicit. It's as lawful as it can be. This is a formal announcement of authority shift from the Jews to the Church of Christians.

    All the measure mentioned may have anything to do with Satan's attack. Because the NT Bible is true in terms of salvation, Satan will have to launch his attack. It drives the need of canonization which actually further secures the contents of our NT Bible.


    In comparison, other holy books are a joke!

    All the measure mentioned may have anything to do with Satan's attack. Because the NT Bible is true in terms of salvation, Satan will have to launch his attack with the tons of false doctrines and false writings. It drives the need of canonization which actually further secures the contents of our NT Bible. The canonization is lawfully supposed to be done by the earthly authority assigned by God. Thus OT Canon was done by the Jews, while NT Canon was done by our earthly Church (back then it was represented by the Catholics).

    Moreover, a valid human account of witnessing is always about the testimony of a human eyewitness. Not a hearsay from an angel. Again Mohammad failed because he failed to know (no human knows) what a true human account of testimony is.

  11. #2005
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    7,869
    Thanks
    3,019
    Thanked 1,400 Times in 1,181 Posts

    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    64748
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawkins View Post
    It is because Koran is commonly referred to as the work of Mohammad. Do you have a verse quote from Koran saying that another witness other than Mohammed is needed for Koran to stand true?

    I listed tons of points and you have only one to respond to?
    There are two witnesses at least as Mohammed didn't write it, but spoke it.

    The only valid point I noticed is your mention of the truth always being understood or verified by at least two witnesses.

    Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

  12. #2006
    Old Timer
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    372
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 59 Times in 48 Posts

    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    15618
    Quote Originally Posted by popsthebuilder View Post
    There are two witnesses at least as Mohammed didn't write it, but spoke it.

    The only valid point I noticed is your mention of the truth always being understood or verified by at least two witnesses.

    Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

    Again, that guy is not an eyewitness of what Mohammad said. In the end, it is just a single account of witnessing indirectly from an angel.

    Mohammad heard what is said by an angel, he himself is not an eyewitness of God. Then the other one wrote it down simply because Mohammad is blind?.

    It's a copy cat type failure!

  13. #2007
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    7,869
    Thanks
    3,019
    Thanked 1,400 Times in 1,181 Posts

    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    64748
    GOD, the angel that delivered the message, Mohammed and his brother.....that's four.

    There are a lot of verses in the Quran speaking about witnessing. Here are a couple for your consideration.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hawkins View Post
    Again, that guy is not an eyewitness of what Mohammad said. In the end, it is just a single account of witnessing indirectly from an angel.

    Mohammad heard what is said by an angel, he himself is not an eyewitness of God. Then the other one wrote it down simply because Mohammad is blind?.

    It's a copy cat type failure!
    5:106. O you who believe! When death comes to one of you (and you wish to make your will) let there be present among you, at the time of making the will, two just persons from among you or two others from among the outsiders, in case you are journeying in the country and the calamity of death overtakes you. In case you doubt (their honesty in giving evidence), you shall detain both (the witnesses) after Prayer, then let them both swear by Allâh (and bear witness) saying, ‘We will accept for this (- our oath) no price; (we will bear true evidence) even though he (in whose favour or against we bear evidence) be near of kin, nor will we hide the testimony (enjoined to be borne uprightly) by Allâh, for if we do so, we shall certainly be among the sinners.’ 5:107. But if it be discovered that these two have become guilty of sin, then let two others stand in their place from among those (heirs) against whom the (former) two (witnesses) who were in a better position (to give true evidence) are sinfully deposed, and the two (latter witnesses) swear by Allâh (saying), ‘Surely, our testimony is truer than the testimony of those two and we have not exceeded the bounds of justice (in bearing the evidence) for, in that case, we shall certainly be of the wrongdoers.’

    Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

  14. #2008
    LIFETIME MEMBER Bright Raven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Calfornia
    Posts
    8,670
    Thanks
    331
    Thanked 4,331 Times in 2,524 Posts

    Mentioned
    43 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147735
    Quote Originally Posted by popsthebuilder View Post
    GOD, the angel that delivered the message, Mohammed and his brother.....that's four.

    There are a lot of verses in the Quran speaking about witnessing. Here are a couple for your consideration.

    5:106. O you who believe! When death comes to one of you (and you wish to make your will) let there be present among you, at the time of making the will, two just persons from among you or two others from among the outsiders, in case you are journeying in the country and the calamity of death overtakes you. In case you doubt (their honesty in giving evidence), you shall detain both (the witnesses) after Prayer, then let them both swear by Allâh (and bear witness) saying, ‘We will accept for this (- our oath) no price; (we will bear true evidence) even though he (in whose favour or against we bear evidence) be near of kin, nor will we hide the testimony (enjoined to be borne uprightly) by Allâh, for if we do so, we shall certainly be among the sinners.’ 5:107. But if it be discovered that these two have become guilty of sin, then let two others stand in their place from among those (heirs) against whom the (former) two (witnesses) who were in a better position (to give true evidence) are sinfully deposed, and the two (latter witnesses) swear by Allâh (saying), ‘Surely, our testimony is truer than the testimony of those two and we have not exceeded the bounds of justice (in bearing the evidence) for, in that case, we shall certainly be of the wrongdoers.’

    Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk
    Are you a Muslim? Do you accept the Quran as your sacred text?
    He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose.

    Jim Elliot

  15. #2009
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    7,869
    Thanks
    3,019
    Thanked 1,400 Times in 1,181 Posts

    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    64748
    Quote Originally Posted by Bright Raven View Post
    Are you a Muslim? Do you accept the Quran as your sacred text?
    Along with the bible and other core sacred texts of the believer.

    I do not consider myself a muslim and most actual muslims wouldn't consider me one either.

    I don't take offence to being referred to as Islamic though; as it simply means submissive to GOD.

    Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

  16. #2010
    LIFETIME MEMBER Bright Raven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Calfornia
    Posts
    8,670
    Thanks
    331
    Thanked 4,331 Times in 2,524 Posts

    Mentioned
    43 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147735
    Quote Originally Posted by popsthebuilder View Post
    Along with the bible and other core sacred texts of the believer.

    I do not consider myself a muslim and most actual muslims wouldn't consider me one either.

    I don't take offence to being referred to as Islamic though; as it simply means submissive to GOD.

    Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk
    The believer has no other core text but the Bible. What other core text is there for a Christian?
    He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose.

    Jim Elliot

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (1 members and 1 guests)

  1. Zeke

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us